Jump to content

What Is The Last Film You Watched? (Older Films)


Mr. Breathmask

Recommended Posts

Watched Fallout yesterday. Still a terrific film. Fun and intense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, The Original said:

We've had our fair share of bannies, many of which have been lifted over the years. There was some controversy years ago when police stormed a screening of Ken Park at a film festival and threatened prosecution against the event organisers.

We had a lot of notorious scandalous movies still banned before 2017 (The Evil Dead, Starship Troopers, Hellraiser, Death Wish, Friday the 13th, Battle Royale, etc.), but during that year they we're all re-rated and approved for distribution and some of those films even have lower ratings than in the US or UK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Great Wall (2016)

Matt Damon, Willem Dafoe, Pedro Pascal and thousands of extras of Asian descent team up to fight an army of Tao Tei, mythical beasties who appear every 60 or so years to remind the Chinese Emperor of the consequences of greed. With severe lack of character development, we're thrown into the mix right from the start. It kind of entertains, but it's not a great venture by any means. Unfortunately, there's a lot of painted-over CGI, and it's not neccesarily the most seamless. Perhaps a period piece that didn't dabble in supernatural creatures and mythical mish-mash would've been a better approach for a film of this name. Ramin Djawadi's score is autopilot oriental epicness, but I fancied the main theme well enough. 

 

** out of ****

 

King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (2017)

I thought this sucked. Weird pacing, strangely told story, and not exactly pleasing to look at. Charlie Hunnam is Arthur, who doesn't actually become king until the final two minutes. Jude Law is Voltigern, his power hungry and homocidal uncle who took the throne from Eric Bana, Art's dad. It's directed by Guy Ritchie, and I guess the eccentricity is in its nature. Pemberton scored it but I couldn't hum you a note. Interestingly two of the most score-worthy scenes are underscored by modern Celtic rock, or something along those lines. Avoid.

 

* out of **** 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watched the Back to the Future trilogy over the course of a couple of nights a while back. Had a lot of fun. The first one is a icon while the next two kind of feel like more of the same, yet somehow they don't quite get all that old by the end of it. Plus, between each of the movies we explore three important periods in human time- the past, the future, and the Wild West. Cheers to Silvestri!

 

Also went through The Mummy and The Mummy Returns. You know, these have there charm, but I just can't quite warm up to them. They lack the quality of the Indiana Jones series, which they clearly ride off of at times, but still hold up as decent adventure flicks that work for a rainy Sunday afternoon and a bucket of popcorn. Probably will never watch them again. Digging Goldsmith's score. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Dieter Stark said:

I think Guy Ritchie just sucks.


Last 10 years, he's gone from hits (the Holmes movies) to 2 flops (Man From UNCLE and King Arthur) back to a hit (Aladdin). Erratic, to say the least.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sweeping Strings said:


Last 10 years, he's gone from hits (the Holmes movies) to 2 flops (Man From UNCLE and King Arthur) back to a hit (Aladdin). Erratic, to say the least.  

 

Aladin would have turned a profit whoever was directing. It was probably a very "safe" project for him. To gain back some clout.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Monuments Men (2014)

Quite dissapointing. Flexing the likes of George Clooney, Matt Damon, John Goodman, Bill Murray, and Cate Blanchett while boasting a story that sounds like a sure fire win, you'd think that Monuments sounds a bit too good to be true. I assure you, it is. A small group of artists and sculptors with no military experience are rallied together in the final year of World War II to protect pieces of art and buildings of significance from both Nazi hands and the Allied bombs. Instead of capturing the pieces before anyone else, they discover the Germans are holding millions of paintings and sculptures in unknown locations for Hitler's planned Fuhrer Museum. 

 

The problem is that it doesn't take itself seriously enough. Naturally, Clooney (who also directs) employs the cast to provide comedic relief, but it falls miserably short and steals from the seriousness and mood of the picture. It's not particularly eye popping to look at, and while it has a good heart it's just not cut out as a good movie. Note that Desplat's score is really good, and that he gets a 20-30s cameo as a French farmer ("Is that Desplat? Ha! That's Desplat!"). 

 

** out of ****

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, The Illustrious Jerry said:

Note that Desplat's score is really good, and that he gets a 20-30s cameo as a French farmer ("Is that Desplat? Ha! That's Desplat!"). 

 

I was surprised he actually had some dialogue lol. It’s like a little subplot. He wasn’t terrible.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I know this thread is for films no longer in theatres, or so I've been told. So I'll just comment on this here. If moderators or members would prefer discussion to take place in the Newer films thread then just say the word, because I don't really understand why there are two in the first place. 

 

Green Book (2018)

I wouldn't say it's hardly deserving of the Oscar- it was a pretty good movie, in my opinion. Besides, 2018 was a bit of a bum year for cinema as it is. I found Green Book to be heartwarming and genuine, all in all with a good heart and a fine spirit. Viggo Mortensen is immensely entertaining, and Mahershala Ali puts forth a great performance. Not the most memorable of best picture winners, but serves its part as a fun yet very relevant road trip buddy picture. 

 

*** and a half * out of ****

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put in my blu of T-2. STILL amazing and so well acted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Terminal (2004)

A distinct reminder that Tom Hanks, Steven Spielberg and John Williams have the innate ability to conjur up such a wide range of stories and settings while still maintaining their heights in cinematic entertainment. It's crazy to think that the same trio that delivered Saving Private Ryan can also pull off a film that's it's polar opposite- a comedy with a side of romance. That's just the genius of Spielberg, I suppose- he's made movies in practically every genre and idiom, and he's done so to great success overall. 

 

Tom Hanks is inherently sweet as Victor Navorski, a Krakohzian citizen who can't leave the terminal because his country was annexed while he was in the air. Hanks kind of gets a chance to be a Mr. Bean type of character- a bit of an oddball with a communicational disadvantage, whose nonetheless kind and innocent. Case in point, very enjoyable and warm, so to speak, and I found it to satisfy my comedic fancies. Stanley Tucci is great. I love Williams' score! Great main theme, with a nice B section. 

 

**** out of ****

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Terminal is one of my favorite comfort food movies ever. This is the part where I'm supposed to call it a guilty pleasure or something like that, but I've never been able to get truly concrete reasons about why people dislike or hate this movie. It's always some vague "Mushy face actors, sentimental", etc. etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can only fully remember two scenes from the film: Stanley Tucci berating Tom Hanks over a photocopier, about bog roll (of all things!) and the janitor stopping the 747.

That's it.

Oh, and Alex McDowell's production design is brilliant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are movies I just don’t vibe with. Things that generally look or feel ugly and unpleasant to sit through.

 

I enjoy The Terminal, though. John Williams and Tom Hanks put me in a good mood and I think it’s actually beautifully shot, one of my favorite Spielberg/Kaminski collabs. Tucci’s great. Script is mostly nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

25 minutes ago, publicist said:

 

That's actually pretty spot on.

 Eleven years on JWFan, you learn some of the staples. ;) Is that it, though? Does it just feel embarrassing for you to watch or something? 

 

 

14 minutes ago, mrbellamy said:

Script is mostly nonsense.

 

As far as causality and all that, sure, but I think the dialogue is fun and quick. This _is_ the dude who wrote Catch Me if You Can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the part where Viktor keeps telling the Rogue One guy to eat shit.

 

Eh, the script is fine. Quick and witty, pretty funny as far as I'm concerned. I'm not crazy about the Zeta-Jones character and the way she's written, and I didn't really catch the whole relationship they had going there. I was also wondering if they correctly portrayed Narvoski. I mean, the grammatical errors he made in English- would those be the same grammatical errors that a real person in that situation would make, or is it just a stereotypical approach at immigrants who aren't great English speakers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, The Illustrious Jerry said:

Eh, the script is fine. Quick and witty, pretty funny as far as I'm concerned. I'm not crazy about the Zeta-Jones character and the way she's written, and I didn't really catch the whole relationship they had going there. I was also wondering if they correctly portrayed Narvoski. I mean, the grammatical errors he made in English- would those be the same grammatical errors that a real person in that situation would make, or is it just a stereotypical approach at immigrants who aren't great English speakers?

 

When I was younger and less...experienced with the language, I had classmates who told me that I reminded them of Viktor Navorski.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Catch Me is Spielberg's last good movie, but it was still too long, a big issue with post-Schindler Spielbergia. He can not do 2+ hour movies without meandering and flat out boring me, Jurassic Parkian films possibly excepted (are they over 2 hrs?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Dieter Stark said:

Catch Me is Spielberg's last good movie, but it was still too long, a big issue with post-Schindler Spielbergia.

 

I once worked with a bloke who whinged about CMIYC not being long enough. Apparently there was a whole section of the book about Frank on trial, which this fella was disappointed wasn't in the film. He was stubbornly in denial when I tried to explain to him that whole aspect wasn't relevant to the urgency of the chase in the film's narrative, so it was rightly axed. Some people just want everything because they're wedded to the idea that "longer = better".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Terminal is gormless fluff, which in itself wouldn't be as objectionable if the story per se would lend itself to such cutesy Disney treatment. Even in 2004 it was pretty obvious, though, that people having to leave/flee their war-torn homes was the new political reality for millions. The cushy 1950's US middle class tangent on which 'The Terminal' operates makes you feel it was actually made in the 50's whereas young-not-yet-filthy rich Spielberg surely would have understood better how to make this story work beyond superficial second-hand ideas. As it is, 70 millions tastefully wasted on great set design stand on the debit side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.